“Performance as the top priority is the defining aspect of C++ for our users. No other programming language provides the performance-critical facilities of C++.” Nope.https://twitter.com/chandlerc1024/status/1242367515751137280 …
-
-
The claim says nothing about whether other languages *can* provide the same performance facilities. Other languages *certainly* can. Paper says that right now they don't. FWIW, I do think Rust comes amazingly close, and in some cases provides other really interesting features.
-
Give me some arbitrary LLVM IR and I can write C++ code and Rust code that both compile to it, so

- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Right, clearly it's not true if we include GLSL, Vulkan, assembly language, C, Rust, LuaJIT, and so on. But most of those have other serious disadvantages as alternatives to C++ in many situations. Most.
-
You seem to be interpreting the paper as just saying C++ results in fast programs, but that's not the statement. It's talking about the facilities available. Otherwise, largely agree...
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The claim in the paper reminds me of this observation about C++ conference talks:https://mobile.twitter.com/hsivonen/status/1122093326319136768 …
-
Not sure what you're talking about, I specifically compare to Rust and Swift on a daily basis.... And almost never compare to C. Anyways, tired of "but my language is better". Languages aren't better or worse, they offer diff tradeoffs. Diff ones are "best" for diff use cases.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
As in, from 